Month: April 2012

Okay I have to say something. Usually I try to stay apolitical, in that I reserve the right to poke fun at either side when they say or do something stupid. I do allow a certain amount of deference to the office of the president, regardless of which idiot is sitting there at the time. But I digress…

Lately there has been something of a movement among conservatives, particularly at the state level, to introduce bans on abortion, and also bans on birth control. Maybe it’s my generation, but I’ve always felt, regardless of which side of the abortion argument you are on, that birth control was the repsonsible alternative. That birth control can and should be promoted as a means of avoiding the issue in the first place, an “ounce of prevention vs a pound of cure” sort of thing.

The idea of promoting a ban on both abortion AND birth control just seems irresponsible. What possible outcome could this achieve other than an increase in the number of unwanted, abused, abandoned, and/or neglected children? This push for banning birth control disguises itself as a “family value”, but I would contend that it is anti-children. (Others have already called it out as being anti-women.) Why would any politician push for a policy that can only result in misery for children? That to me just seems like the worst sort of cruelty.

It is highly controversial, but there is one study that takes it a step further. If you assume unwanted pregnancies lead to unwanted, abused, abandoned and/or neglected children. And if you assume that those children are at higher risk for committing crime as teenagers or young adults, then one result of Roe v Wade in 1973 would be a corresponding reduction in crime 15 to 20 years later.

That drop in crime in the late 80’s and early 90’s is exactly what happened. Athough as I said, making the connection back to the availability of abortion is very controversial. Not so much because the science is tenuous (hint – all social science is tenuous), or because it requires big leaps or assumptions (it does require assumptions – they are not that big), but rather because the whole concept reaks of “social engineering” which scares the living bejeesus out of people, especially people who remember nazi germany and their “experiments” in social engineering.

Still, the data is there, it seems to be a clear correlation. People, some people, will find it hard to accept, counter-intuitive even, that abortion benefits society. And they will question at what cost. Rightly so, it is right to question the cost to the individual for any benefit to society. That aside, I am just seriously perplexed as to why there is any question at all about birth control. I defy anyone to make a reasonable argument as to how a ban on birth control could possibly be a benefit to either the individual or to society.